Posted on 22-1-2003

US & UK v UN
By Glenn Kessler and Colum Lynch, Washington Post Staff Writers, Tuesday,
January 21, 2003

UNITED NATIONS, Jan. 20 -- France suggested today it would wage a major
diplomatic fight, including possible use of its veto power, to prevent the
U.N. Security Council from passing a resolution authorizing military action
against Iraq.

France's opposition to a war, emphatically delivered here by Foreign
Minister Dominique de Villepin, is a major blow for the Bush
administration, which has begun pouring tens of thousands of troops into
the Persian Gulf in preparation for a military conflict this spring. The
administration had hoped to mark the final phase in its confrontation with
Iraq when U.N. weapons inspectors deliver a progress report Monday. But in
a diplomatic version of an ambush, France and other countries used a
high-level Security Council meeting on terrorism to lay down their markers
for the debate that will commence next week on the inspectors' report.
Russia and China, which have veto power, and Germany, which will chair the
Security Council in February, also signaled today they were willing to let
the inspections continue for months.

Only Britain appeared to openly support the U.S. position that Iraqi
President Saddam Hussein has thwarted effective inspections. "If war is the
only way to resolve this problem, we are going down a dead end," de
Villepin told reporters. "Already we know for a fact that Iraq's weapons of
mass destruction programs are being largely blocked, even frozen. We must
do everything possible to strengthen this process." The United Nations, he
said, should stay "on the path of cooperation. The other choice is to move
forward out of impatience over a situation in Iraq to move towards military
intervention. We believe that today nothing justifies envisaging military
action."

Secretary of State Colin L. Powell, in the face of such comments, departed
from his prepared text on terrorism and implored his colleagues to remember
that the Security Council resolution passed unanimously Nov. 8 gave Iraq "a
last chance" to meet its obligations. "We must not shrink from our duties
and our responsibilities when the material comes before us next week,"
Powell said. He used a variation of the phrase "must not shrink" three more
times as he addressed the council.

During the weeks of debate on the Iraq resolution, French officials had
indicated they were open to some sort of military intervention if Iraq did
not comply. But now the French appear to have set much higher hurdles for
support. Rising opposition to war, particularly in France, appears to have
played a role in the hardening positions on the Security Council. Foreign
officials are also aware of polls in the United States suggesting that
support for a war drops dramatically if the Bush administration does not
have U.N. approval.

While the United Nations was debating today, U.S. military officials
announced that the Army is sending a force of about 37,000 soldiers,
spearheaded by the Texas-based 4th Infantry Division, to the Persian Gulf
region. It is the largest ground force identified among an estimated
125,000 U.S. troops ordered to deploy since Christmas Eve, the Associated
Press reported. At the United Nations, several foreign ministers said a war
in Iraq would spawn more terrorist acts around the globe and, in the words
of Germany's Joschka Fischer, have "disastrous consequences for long-term
regional stability." "Terrorism is far from being crushed," said Russian
Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov. "We must be careful not to take unilateral
steps that might threaten the unity of the entire [anti-]terrorism
coalition. In this context we are strictly in favor of a political
settlement of the situation revolving around Iraq."

Powell replied: "We cannot fail to take the action that may be necessary
because we are afraid of what others might do. We cannot be shocked into
impotence because we are afraid of the difficult choices that are ahead of
us." But when the foreign ministers emerged from the council debate and
addressed reporters, it appeared that Powell's pleas had made little
impact. Although President Bush said last week he was "sick and tired of
games and deception," Fischer said the inspections were a success. "Iraq
has complied fully with all relevant resolutions and cooperated very
closely with the U.N. team on the ground," Fischer said. "We think things
are moving in the right direction, based on the efforts of the inspection
team, and [they] should have all the time which is needed."

Chinese Foreign Minister Tang Jiaxuan said Monday's report should be
regarded as a "new beginning" rather than an end to inspections. The chief
weapons inspectors "have been talking about that there is more work to do
in terms of the inspections and they need more time. I think we should
respect their opinion and support their work."

De Villepin, in a lengthy and at times theatrical news conference, was
asked whether France would use its veto power to thwart Washington's
campaign for quick action. He said France "will shoulder its
responsibilities, faithful to the principles it has." France would never
"associate ourselves with military intervention that is not supported by
the international community," de Villepin added. "We think that military
intervention would be the worst possible solution." France, as chair of the
Security Council this month, had organized today's meeting on terrorism in
part to draw attention to its contention that the Iraq situation has
detracted from the more pressing need to confront international terrorism.

De Villepin reacted coolly to suggestions, made by senior Bush
administration officials Sunday, that Hussein and his top advisers be
offered political asylum outside Iraq to avert a war. "The problem is
something more difficult than a question of change of regime," he said.
"Let us not be diverted from our objective. It is the disarmament of Iraq."

U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan also indirectly criticized the prospect
of war when he addressed the council on terrorism. "Any sacrifice of
freedom or the rule of law within states -- or any generation of new
disputes between states in the name of anti-terrorism -- is to hand the
terrorists a victory that no act of theirs could possibly bring," he said,
alluding to frequent U.S. assertions that the confrontation with Iraq is
part of the larger war on terrorism.

The only sign of support for the U.S. position came from its closest ally,
Britain. Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said "time was running out" for
Hussein and his "cat and mouse" game. But Straw added that Britain
preferred a U.N. resolution authorizing force. "Iraq has a responsibility
now to avoid a conflict, to avoid a war," Powell told reporters. "There is
no question that Iraq continues to misunderstand the seriousness of the
position that it's in. "If the United Nations is going to be relevant," he
added, "it has to take a firm stand."

UK, Support for War Falls to New Low
by Alan Travis, The Guardian UK, Tuesday 21 January 2003

Support among British voters for military action against Iraq has slumped
six points in the last month to its lowest level since pollsters ICM began
regularly tracking opinion on the question for the Guardian last summer.
This month's Guardian/ICM survey shows that outright opposition to the war
has risen to 47%, the highest level on any poll since last August.

The survey results also show that an overwhelming 81% of British voters now
agree with the international development secretary, Clare Short, that a
fresh United Nations mandate is essential before a military attack is
launched on Saddam Hussein. The ICM poll shows that Britain's citizens are
not yet gripped by fear that they or their immediate family are likely to
be a victim of a terrorist attack. However, about half the population say
they are personally anxious about the prospect, with most saying they are
"fairly worried" rather than "very worried".

The poll data shows that those most anxious about the terrorist threat in
Britain tend to be women who are older and poorer. The results of the
tracker question on an Iraq war shows that opposition to a war has risen
steadily from 37% in October to 47% now. Over the same period support for
military action has fallen from a peak of 42% to only 30% now. Among Labour
voters opposition to the war has strengthened to 43%, with 38% in favour.
Even among Conservative voters, more oppose the war than support it, at 41%
against and 38% for. The ICM poll also strongly vindicates Charles
Kennedy's decision to come out with a strong anti-war position as 62% of
Liberal Democrat voters say they oppose military action and only 19% are in
favour. The results continue to show a gender split with a majority of
women, 52%, now opposed to war compared with 41% of men.

The war tracker poll sends a clear message to Tony Blair that the
overwhelming majority of British voters - 81% - now believe that a fresh UN
resolution is essential before a military attack is launched, and not just
"preferable" as the prime minister has said. Even two-thirds of those who
support military action say they believe a fresh UN mandate is necessary,
and only 10% of those polled believe that the war should start regardless
of whether or not it has explicit new backing from the UN security council.

ICM asked about the level of anxiety people felt that they or their
immediate family might become a victim of a terrorist attack in Britain.
The results showed a relatively relaxed population, with 51% saying they
were worried and 48% saying they were not. Only 15% said they were "very
worried" about the prospect. Again there is a clear divide on gender lines
with 61% of women expressing anxiety about the terrorist threat but only
41% of men admitting concern. The profile of those most worried - older,
poorer, women - most closely fits the readership of downmarket tabloid
newspapers who have talked up the danger of terrorism in Britain in recent
months.

· ICM interviewed a random sample of 1,002 adults aged 18 and over by
telephone from January 17-19 2003. Interviews were conducted across the
country and the results have been weighted to the profile of all adults.